Return to Baseball Leftovers

what exactly is moneyball?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Strasil42 » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:41 pm

explain it to me then, since you know so much. why is it better to draft these players?


Sorry, not trying to sound like a know it all, but you actually need to read the book first, thats why everyone says that. People who dont read the book get the wrong facts.

again, if anyone wants to give me some solid proof moneyball works, ill be very willing to listen



Over the last four years they've won more games than the Yankees

I think your missing the whole point. If oakland didnt use this approach they would be another royals or expos. They dont have the money to get players like most of the other teams. They have to find undervalued players. And billy beane did draft all of those pitchers.

Heres 2 links to a thread that should knock some sense into ya.

http://www.fantasybaseballcafe.com/foru ... =moneyball

http://www.fantasybaseballcafe.com/foru ... =moneyball
Strasil42
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4294
(Past Year: -53)
Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Omaha

Postby Amazinz » Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:55 pm

I think you should read the book. You might still dislike Beane's methods but at least you'll have them presented to you in a much better fashion than we can pull off on a message board.

But how can you ask for proof that Beane's methods work? It's obvious they work. Call it Moneyball, call it magic, call it you want but they win, right? :-D And no team in baseball except the Yankees match the amount of games that the A's win.

Now forget about the Yankees for a moment and consider the Mets. The Mets are always in the top 5 in revenue and are normally #2 or #3 behind the Yankees and Sox and they share the same market as the Yankees do. They get overshadowed by the Yankees success and George Steinbrenner's spending sprees but it's absolutely amazing to consider how bad the Mets are/have been and how much money they continue to make.

The Mets have gone an awfully long time with nothing to show for a whole lot of money (except for the exciting run in 2000). Beane's been with the A's for what? 6 years now? Within two years and a fraction of the financial resources (that the Mets have) they have almost doubled the Mets win output over the span of four years.

Anyone who is not impressed by this is just hating IMO. ;-)
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
Amazinz
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18680
(Past Year: -120)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: in Canada, toughening up figure skaters

Postby tlef316 » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:12 pm

well, after all this, i just checked my school's library and they dont have Moneyball. im very intrigued by this debate, which for the most part has been pretty inteligent. ;-D

im gonna try and pick the book up tomorrow, and ill dive into it with an open mind. as i said before, success is a very relative concept. if all the moneyballers want to do is win regualar season games and make the playoffs, ill accept that and pat them on the back for achieving their goal. its tough for "small market" ( a term which i dont like) teams to do well, and i applaud the A's for doing that. they took a very sensible and rational approach to building a franchise and they have done well as a result.

i believe as a sports fan(Jets :-/ as well as yankees) that a team's goal should be a championship, whether it is the goal this year or 5 years from now. IMO, the moneyball system gives a team a lesser chance to draft superstar hitters and it is debatable whether their success in pitching will continue.

i think that these "safe" draft picks limit a team's potential to be great, and therefore win titles. that may be ok for some people, and its a good accomplishment for a team with limited resources. but you cant play it safe all the time. sometimes you have to swing for the fences and go for the big payoffs. guys like alfonso soriano and carlos beltran are not moneyball players, but nobody can deny the impact they have on a baseball game.

im sure everyone is tired of reading what i type and quite frankly, im tired of typing it. ill read money ball this week(hopefully) and ill report back what i think. in the meantime, i guess my thoughts on thee subject are pretty clear. have a good weekend guys. enjoy the football ;-D
Last edited by tlef316 on Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
tlef316
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1733
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 3 Dec 2002
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: central jersey

Postby jsmith378 » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:34 pm

good discussion guys

first off, someone said runs is all that matters in an offense, obviously thats true. But look at the A's ranks in the AL in runs scored (taking the whole MLB doesnt work cuz the AL has the DH)
2004- 8th
2003- 9th
2002- 8th
Three straight year of being a below average offense. I'm trying to say that most of the A's success is from the big three and their pitching, their offense has never been great (probably because Beane knows that it's almost impossible for small market teams to afford nine good hitters).

Someone else also said that the twins have been emulating the A's system, which couldnt be further from the truth. The Twins are still a 'toolsy' team and they love speed (which beane says is overrated) and great defense. They also play small ball, steal bases, and sacrifice guys over: Beane doesnt believe in that style of play
jsmith378
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 179
(Past Year: -7)
Joined: 10 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: KC

Postby SaintsOfTheDiamond » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:44 pm

Wow, this has been the best, most intellegent debates I've ever seen on a web board. ;-D I've been wanting to read the book but just haven't had the time. Looks like I need to quit studying so hard and get me a copy...lol. :-D
Image
Member #4 of the Inaugural Yadier Molina Fan Club!!!
SaintsOfTheDiamond
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 6044
(Past Year: -436)
Joined: 6 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Swiping second

Postby Amazinz » Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:50 pm

I realize the comment I made about the Twins was a mistake. In my haste to make my point my fingers were moving quicker than my brain. :-°
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
Amazinz
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18680
(Past Year: -120)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: in Canada, toughening up figure skaters

Postby kimchi_chigae » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:03 pm

how about the indians? are they considered to be in the moneyball theory? they have a young, cheap team, very different from the indians of manny and thome.
kimchi_chigae Beginner
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 14259
(Past Year: -616)
Joined: 27 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Osaka Jail

Postby ocmusicjunkie » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:54 pm

tlef316,

I'll try my best to summarize why it's better to take what you call "safe" draft picks, if you're a small market team. I still suggest you read the book though, because I can't possibly compress 300 pages of evidence to one post.


Basically, every MLB team is searching for stud prospects. Guys who can hit 35 jacks a year, bat .320, or snag 50 bases. So any player who even has an outside chance at these stats is snatched before he has a chance to really prove himself. Basically, looking for those types of players, you have to roll the dice. You have to draft them younger, pay them more money, and then pray they work out. When you’re a team that can’t afford to buy great players on the open market, the last thing you can afford is a 95% fail rate on your draft picks (which most MLB teams have). Instead, Beane looked at the more predictable stats. The ones which players most likely would carry over into the big leagues, and the ones which aren’t as overvalued.

The entire concept is quantity of quality, not quality of quality. Beane would rather draft 10 guys who make solid players in the majors than draft 9 failures and 1 all-star. Why? Because he can’t go out and buy players to fill the slots of those nine failures.

So yes, you are right. The moneyball draft process isn’t nearly as likely to produce all-star hitters. But it is the best way to ensure your team has a constant flow of respectable prospects coming through the farm system.

People are always going to say “oh, he just has the big three pitchers so he wins”. But really, that isn’t so much the case. As of last night, Oakland was 9th in the majors. 12th in runs scored. Neither number is spectacular, but look where other teams rank. If a team is top 10 in hitting, they are far below in pitching, and vise-versa. The only exception to this would appear to be the Cards. Oakland is a very well-rounded team.

And no, they haven’t won a world series yet. But I think being consistently in the playoffs on a yearly basis (and leading MLB in wins over four years) is much more of an accomplishment than a fluke WS victory like the Marlins or Angels had.
Help please:
http://www.fantasybaseballcafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1086524#1086524


Harden- 2.15 ERA, 7.61 K/9
Peavy - 2.89 ERA, 10.10 K/9

[b]Lets go Rich![/b]
ocmusicjunkie
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 828
Joined: 6 Jul 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby tlef316 » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:58 pm

ocmusicjunkie wrote:tlef316,

I'll try my best to summarize why it's better to take what you call "safe" draft picks, if you're a small market team. I still suggest you read the book though, because I can't possibly compress 300 pages of evidence to one post.


Basically, every MLB team is searching for stud prospects. Guys who can hit 35 jacks a year, bat .320, or snag 50 bases. So any player who even has an outside chance at these stats is snatched before he has a chance to really prove himself. Basically, looking for those types of players, you have to roll the dice. You have to draft them younger, pay them more money, and then pray they work out. When you’re a team that can’t afford to buy great players on the open market, the last thing you can afford is a 95% fail rate on your draft picks (which most MLB teams have). Instead, Beane looked at the more predictable stats. The ones which players most likely would carry over into the big leagues, and the ones which aren’t as overvalued.

The entire concept is quantity of quality, not quality of quality. Beane would rather draft 10 guys who make solid players in the majors than draft 9 failures and 1 all-star. Why? Because he can’t go out and buy players to fill the slots of those nine failures.

So yes, you are right. The moneyball draft process isn’t nearly as likely to produce all-star hitters. But it is the best way to ensure your team has a constant flow of respectable prospects coming through the farm system.

People are always going to say “oh, he just has the big three pitchers so he wins”. But really, that isn’t so much the case. As of last night, Oakland was 9th in the majors. 12th in runs scored. Neither number is spectacular, but look where other teams rank. If a team is top 10 in hitting, they are far below in pitching, and vise-versa. The only exception to this would appear to be the Cards. Oakland is a very well-rounded team.

And no, they haven’t won a world series yet. But I think being consistently in the playoffs on a yearly basis (and leading MLB in wins over four years) is much more of an accomplishment than a fluke WS victory like the Marlins or Angels had.


good post ;-D i still think the jury is out on moneyball until we see if beane can replenish the pitching staff, but at least you were willing to make an arguement, as opposed to others who said "read the book, beane is a genius"

like i said, im gonna read the book.
tlef316
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1733
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 3 Dec 2002
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: central jersey

Postby LCBOY » Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:58 pm

kimchi_chigae wrote:how about the indians? are they considered to be in the moneyball theory? they have a young, cheap team, very different from the indians of manny and thome.


Not so different. Remember when Thome, Manny, et. al, signed long term deals as young players before they hit FA status? When Thome, Manny, Baerga, were young they were cheap, too. How much will V-Mart command on the open market in a few years? Hafner?
LCBOY
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2653
(Past Year: -185)
Joined: 10 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: On third base trying to steal home.

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron